Visual Coverage Map — Module 06
Canonical profile audited: .agents/visual-profiles/trainings/construction-plan-drafting-and-coordination.md from PR #4527, profile version 1, reviewed 2026-10-05. The profile is read-only for this PR.
| Asset | Objective | Learning question | Medium choice / profile fit | Technical plausibility and authority | Semantic colors / construction-document language | Accessibility | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| permit-lifecycle | 1,4 | How does a project move from pre-application to occupancy? | Shared Flowchart. Correct lifecycle medium because review, corrections, approval, construction change, closeout, and occupancy form a branched loop. | Reflects P.D. 1096 permit/change/closeout duties, BFP permit/occupancy gates, and current local-process variability. | Uses document states, approved-change, review, permit, completion, and occupancy language. No fake permit stamp or government form is shown. | Labeled nodes/branches carry state meaning independently of color. | Profile-aligned |
| multidisciplinary-submission-map | 2,5 | What information streams form the permit package and who owns them? | Shared Flowchart. Converging document streams plus completeness decision justify workflow representation. | Keeps architectural, civil/structural, MEPF, fire, admin/site, calculations, and supporting records separate while preserving professional responsibility. | Discipline names are explicit text labels; no assumed color legend. Package/issue-control vocabulary matches construction-document practice. | Every discipline stream is named; no reliance on colored lanes. | Profile-aligned |
| obo-review-loop | 3 | What happens after filing and before permit issuance? | Shared Flowchart. Appropriate for documentary screening → OBO/BFP/referral evaluation → correction/resubmission → assessment/issuance. | FSEC/technical-review logic is consistent with the BFP RIRR and current permit framework; local routing remains qualified. | Approval/deficiency/resubmission labels follow controlled-review language; no invented reviewer stamps. | Decision branches are text-labeled and status accents are redundant. | Profile-aligned |
| comments-resubmission | 3,5 | How should a team close a permit comment without causing new conflicts? | Shared Flowchart. Correct for issue ownership, impact review, correction, cross-check, and resubmission. | Prevents one-sheet fixes and preserves responsible-professional routing. | Uses issue/comment/revise/cross-check/resubmit terminology consistent with coordination registers and revision control. | Explicit issue states and branch labels; concise node wording. | Profile-aligned |
| permit-to-occupancy | 1,4 | How do approved plans, construction changes, completion records, FSIC, and occupancy relate? | Shared Flowchart. Correct document-lifecycle medium. | Reflects Building Official approval of plan changes, Section 308 completion records, BFP FSIC prerequisite, and OBO Certificate of Occupancy sequence. | Controlled-document status language; no fake occupancy certificate, signature, or seal. | Text states communicate sequence independently of semantic accents. | Profile-aligned |
Profile-level audit
- Primary visual modes: five true workflows; this is appropriate for permit processing because the learning target is process/control rather than geometric drafting.
- Technical plausibility: permit, FSEC/FSIC, change-approval, completion, and occupancy relationships are supported by cited Philippine authorities; local sequencing is never universalized.
- Semantic discipline colors: no asset depends on color to distinguish OBO, BFP, architecture, engineering, or status; labels and branch text carry the distinction.
- Construction-document language: uses controlled package, review comment, revision, approval, resubmission, supersession/current issue, closeout, and occupancy terminology.
- Accessibility: shared renderer provides titles/descriptions and derived process text; every decision has labeled branches.
- Cognitive load: each flow isolates one permit/review question; the lifecycle map is the only broad overview.
- Rendered-geometry limitation: source-level/profile alignment was audited; no browser rendering or production geometry inspection was performed.